Author
Topic: Michael Savage (Read 75598 times)

I wrote in an earlier post that Noory has brought the show to the point where the guest could be pre-recorded while throwing in a few Noory "absolutelys", "garshes" and "could it be a robot?" at inopportune moments.

Well, Michael Savage has been doing that for years now. Sometimes the entire last hour of the show is a pre-recorded guest played as though live, with grunts of approval or disagreement and the occasional "really?, go on" from Michael Savage as he listens to the recording with the rest of us.

To me it is bizarre, substandard radio and harkens back to the old Soviet-style Radio Moscow days.

He's almost 70. I guess I like him enough that I don't hold it against him that he gave up on the third hour. 2 hours of Savage is way better than 3 hours of a phony radio show. Wish this country had more men like Savage.

A weiner he may be, (his given last-name), a weiner that I really enjoy listening to, whether I agree with his stuff or not. The man thinks on his feet. Upon first hearing him I instantly disliked his ways- his self aggrandizing estimates of brilliance, the way his call in conversations are mostly one-way, and how he steps on and redirects the callers points, even to the point of belittling them. All these annoying traits have since become endearing to me. Entertaining, weird old uncle Mike.

His show is a voyage into the mind of a schizophreniac. The mood swings are unreal,he'll often contradict himself within a sentence. Constant internal conflict from this guy is obvious if you listen over a sustained amount of time. He's quite entertaining...but I can't take any of what he says seriously. The donations to Jerry Brown and bizarre letters to Allen Ginsberg raise questions about his true feelings in politics and sexuality.

His show is a voyage into the mind of a schizophreniac. The mood swings are unreal,he'll often contradict himself within a sentence. Constant internal conflict from this guy is obvious if you listen over a sustained amount of time. He's quite entertaining...but I can't take any of what he says seriously. The donations to Jerry Brown and bizarre letters to Allen Ginsberg raise questions about his true feelings in politics and sexuality.

You've hit upon some very interesting points. The guy is an anomaly wrapped in a conundrum. He can be very entertaining and incisive.

His show is a voyage into the mind of a schizophreniac. The mood swings are unreal,he'll often contradict himself within a sentence. Constant internal conflict from this guy is obvious if you listen over a sustained amount of time. He's quite entertaining...but I can't take any of what he says seriously. The donations to Jerry Brown and bizarre letters to Allen Ginsberg raise questions about his true feelings in politics and sexuality.

I can't take any of what he says seriously. The donations to Jerry Brown and bizarre letters to Allen Ginsberg raise questions about his true feelings in politics and sexuality.

His politics have evolved over his lifetime, like anybody's. You can't judge where he stands today by what his politics were when he was 30. Remember, Ronald Reagan was once a devoted member of the Democrat Party. He's truly an independent and an open book, his virulent criticism of Bush is only one example. And his 'contradicting himself within a sentence' is often satirical, like Rush, but much more subtle.

The basic tenets of his show are brilliant: He has defined a nation with three words: Borders, Language, and Culture. America sorely needs to strengthen all three. Call me a nationalist if you want, but I agree with him wholeheartedly.

The Jerry Brown donations were in 2006, at the age of 64. His allegedly conservative son had a $25,000 donation to Gavin Newsom last year(it was sent back after gay pressure groups complained)

So what? So everything he says is made up for ratings? He's an independent.I seem to remember him saying that he regretted donating to Jerry Brown's campaign, that he felt that he was misled by Jerry Brown, who was a personal acquaintance of Savage, and he later said he regretted it.

Well, Michael Savage has been doing that for years now. Sometimes the entire last hour of the show is a pre-recorded guest played as though live, with grunts of approval or disagreement and the occasional "really?, go on" from Michael Savage as he listens to the recording with the rest of us.

To me it is bizarre, substandard radio and harkens back to the old Soviet-style Radio Moscow days.

Yes,it's absolutely hysterical. Shame on those guests who allow this charade to occur. The inserted phrases like "Oh my God" are so awkwardly placed that it almost seems intentionally bad.

Some of it may be sincere, after reading that Salon.com piece I basically came away thinking that the guy was an opportunist at best.

"Misled" by Jerry Brown? The guy wasn't an unknown, he has a long-established leftist history going back 40 years. Savage was embarrassed that he got exposed, hence the back-peddling. Imagine how Savage would react if Glenn Beck or Hannity got busted for supporting a liberal.

Some of it may be sincere, after reading that Salon.com piece I basically came away thinking that the guy was an opportunist at best.

"Misled" by Jerry Brown? The guy wasn't an unknown, he has a long-established leftist history going back 40 years. Savage was embarrassed that he got exposed, hence the back-peddling. Imagine how Savage would react if Glenn Beck or Hannity got busted for supporting a liberal.

Savage's fans should google the phrase "Vital Signs"...

If you want to read something much more accurate about him, read the article Playboy did on him last year, or the New Yorker article from '09.

On Jerry Brown, that's one of the things I like about Savage, he'll back someone that he thinks is better than their opponent, regardless of who has the D or the R next to their name. Beck, Hannity, etc would never do that. They only do party line shit. Savage is truly an independent.

I have Vital Signs, it's a good book. It's fiction. He's a talented writer. He's written something like 30 books since about 1970. I bet you haven't read it. But you're willing to judge him by it. So are you saying we should judge him by a work of fiction that he wrote? Should we do that with all authors? That would make Stephen King a psychopath, Anne Rice a vampire, and JK Rowling a witch. I love how only a conservative like Savage can be criticized by a work of fiction that includes a man who struggles with his sexuality, and questioned as though somehow it proves that he is a closeted homosexual. If a liberal writes the same book he's applauded as brave.

If you want to read something much more accurate about him, read the article Playboy did on him last year, or the New Yorker article from '09.

I have Vital Signs, it's a good book. It's fiction. He's a talented writer. He's written something like 30 books since about 1970. I bet you haven't read it. But you're willing to judge him by it.

Alright, I get it, you're a dues-paying member of the Paul Revere Society. He can do no wrong by you. And that's fine, different strokes...

"Vital Signs" is a Roman a clef from all accounts. I will judge him by that and his letter to Ginsberg. Like many rapid homophobes, it's self-loathing over his own urges that drive his rants. Only someone with a deep-seated(pun intended) issue of their own would be irritated and consumed by homosexuality.

All of that aside, I do listen to his show on a regular basis. I find him to be a compelling host, and entertaining. At the end of the day that's all that matters...I don't get my ideology from radio hosts.

I was reminded of a major gripe against "Savage" this evening. That's that he is only live for about 8 hours a week. The "third hour" is canned interviews and recycled phone calls. He works 4 day weeks, usually his Wednesday or Thursday program is re-run, I mean "encore segment" ...or even worse that predictable neo-con Jeff Kuhner(seems like a decent guy,but you can predict what he'll say like clockwork) fills-in.

Why doesn't he just shorten his show to 2 hours instead of having a rehashed 3rd hour?

It's really pretty lame isn't it? His third hour used to be some of the best radio around, too. Seems like he would relax a little more for the third hour and get more into the shit only he gets into like literature, art, history, nostalgia, music, philosophy, etc...

I dread the day that his show ceases to exist. He's really a modern day Jean Shepherd, but better.

When I was more of an avid listener to Savage I couldn't wait to tune in to hear his commentary on the day's events. Yes, he can be acerbic, but I have never laughed so much in my life. Unfortunately, I have not listened much in the last year.

He says lots of things I disagree with, but he is a terrific radio personality. Much, much better and more interesting than most broadcasters on the stations which carry his program. I don't live near any stations which carry his show anymore, though.

I noticed the pre-recorded segments as well, it usually seems to be an interview. Sometimes it sounds like a different person does the interview and asks the questions, then they edit in Savage's voice later. Still, it is better than some of George's questions, because actual thought and effort went into it, edited and pre-recorded though it may be.